Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Comair Sues Lex Airport, Files Against FAA  
User currently offlineKarlB737 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3105 posts, RR: 10
Posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5841 times:

Courtesy: Cincinnati Business Courier

Comair Sues Lex Airport, Files Against FAA Over Plane Crash

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnat.../daily58.html?b=1160366400^1361048

31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2888 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5826 times:

This should be a very interesting case. I can see where Comair is coming from on this, but can also see a lot of pushback. All I hope is that the litigation does not take such a long time that it hurts the families of the deceased.


"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlineMilesrich From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2000 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5760 times:

It's a b.s. lawsuit. If the flight crew had checked their heading, before proceeding down an unlit runway, there would have been no accident.

User currently offlineANNOYEDFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 451 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 5556 times:

Actually it's the FAA'S fault. This isn't the first time a jet rolled down the wrong runway at LEX, it's just the first time it wasen't caught in time and crashed. I spoke with a Captain I was flying with a few weeks ago about the insident and I wish I had written down what it's called but something that a pilot can file with the FAA to expedite a serious change needed at a airport and low and behold LEX had an issue with confusing taxi ways or something in that nature.

I believe he said that the taxi way they used or a new one wasen't even on their maps yet, but the day after the crash along came the change he said that should of been done years ago. I believe he said he was at the airport when a plane took to the same wrong runway and if not for the air traffic controller telling them to abort their take off they would of been in the field. It also wasen't the first time it happened. Remember the FAA usual waits till death comes before a change is made.

I'll never forget one year in recurrent we had a FAA cabin manager in our class because of a new instructor being trained. He began telling stories of when he flew for TWA and the F/O was so drunk the Captain threatened them not to tell and they would fly the LAS-JFK route on the L-1011 anyway. I coulden't believe what I was hearing. I mean this guy was passed out carted to the plane is what he basically said! All I'll say is he was a bit shocked at my reaction and what I had to say.....

On a final note if you only knew what a schedule could look like at a regional airline most of you woulden't make it through the first day let alone a drive, commute, 5 legs, and minimum rest for 4 days. Another thing Comair itself is big on or atleast was is stand-up overnights. You get in "rest" for about 4 hours and your back in the air.



"TWA... One Mission, Yours."
User currently offlineSkyHarborsHome From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 273 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5468 times:

Quoting ANNOYEDFA (Reply 3):
Actually it's the FAA'S fault.

I think many of us respectfully disagree. I have a feeling this one will be in the courts for a long time.



Fly CHD!
User currently offlineCrogalski From United States of America, joined May 2005, 514 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5358 times:

Quoting ANNOYEDFA (Reply 3):
Actually it's the FAA'S fault

Everybody is at fault on this one.. the FAA, the Pilots, and the Lex Tower. It was a stupid mistake, that unfortunately costed 49 lives.



A319 A320 B717 B727 B737 B747 B757 B767 C152 C172 DC9 E145 E190 MD88 PA28 | B6 CO DL FL NK NW LO TW
User currently offlineLincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5231 times:

Quoting Crogalski (Reply 5):
Everybody is at fault on this one.. the FAA, the Pilots, and the Lex Tower. It was a stupid mistake, that unfortunately costed 49 lives.

Don't forget to include airport management.

Virtually every major accident is the result of a series of otherwise small mistakes...

If the pilots had checked their heading, the accident may have been avoided.
If there had been two people in the tower, someone may have noticed
If the taxiway had been more clearly marked, the pilots may never have lined up on the wrong runway
If the flight was an hour earlier or an hour later, the absence of runway lighting or additional daylight may have provided sufficient visual cues.
...I could go on...

It is unfourtinate that 49 people's lives were cut short (and one suffered serious injuries) but all of the blame can't land on one person/entity.

Lincoln



CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
User currently offlineCactus739 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2448 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5216 times:

Quoting ANNOYEDFA (Reply 3):
Another thing Comair itself is big on or atleast was is stand-up overnights. You get in "rest" for about 4 hours and your back in the air.

The Comair flight crew's schedule has been public knowledge since right after the incident (note the spelling..with a c, not an s). They were not on a "stand up" overnight. They were all on more than adaquate rest. I'd have to dig through the numerous threads to find out exactly, but I believe the captain flew in Friday and the co-pilot flew in Saturday afternoon with the FA. (or it could be the other way around)

Quoting Crogalski (Reply 5):
costed

Really?



You can't fix stupid.... - Ron White
User currently offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5193 times:

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 2):
It's a b.s. lawsuit

I completely aggree, this is like a sports store getting sued for a gun that caused a murder.



"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
User currently offlineCrogalski From United States of America, joined May 2005, 514 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5086 times:

Quoting Cactus739 (Reply 7):
Quoting Crogalski (Reply 5):
costed

Really?

My apologies for the miswording. I think you know what I meant though.



A319 A320 B717 B727 B737 B747 B757 B767 C152 C172 DC9 E145 E190 MD88 PA28 | B6 CO DL FL NK NW LO TW
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5067 times:

So let me see . . . .

ComAir is filing against the airport because their pilots lined up their plane in the dark on an unlit runway while a perfectly lit runway was crossing directly in front of them and their pilots crashed their plane and as a result 49 of their passengers were tragically killed?  crazy 

I don't dispute the Tower earns some blame for being understaffed.

But this lawsuit is akin to suing the City of Anchorage because I run a redlight that had a burned out bulb against cross traffic and had a massive traffic accident. Ridiculous.


User currently offline57AZ From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2550 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4985 times:

Quoting SkyHarborsHome (Reply 4):
I have a feeling this one will be in the courts for a long time.

Personally I doubt so. FAA's attorneys will probably get the suit dismissed on legal grounds such as lack of merit. I feel sorry for the pilot that survived as his career is practically over. Most likely his family's financial solvency will be destroyed by the lawsuits resulting from this case as many companies no longer provide legal defense for employees in the conduct of their duties. He made a tragic mistake and 48 innocent passengers and crew perished.



"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."
User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4725 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 10):
But this lawsuit is akin to suing the City of Anchorage because I run a redlight that had a burned out bulb against cross traffic and had a massive traffic accident.

Pep, you just opened a puddle of mud with that comment.

Suing the city of Anchorage? Perhaps not; but you'd be damn sure that I'd be in court claiming my innocence if the bulb was burnt out and I unknowingly entered an intersection without signal or signage.

Especially if I wasn't from the area and had no idea that there was a cross street in my direction of travel.

You'd be hard pressed to find a driver that comes to a random, blind stop without signal or signage to indicate such with the exception of the pizza guy with a burnt out tail light looking for an unfamiliar address.

I'm pretty sure I know (and agree) with your intended premise, but the analogy of the burnt out stoplight that you're proposing sucks balls.  Wink



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 693 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4623 times:

This is a normal part of the process of accident litigation. First of all, the victims (plaintiffs) attorneys will sue any and all parties. This will include Comair, the pilots, the FAA and the airport, maybe even the aircraft manufacturer if there is some basis for that. In addition, each of the defendants will cross-sue against the other defendants, as Comair is doing here. In the end, they all may share some of the blame and liability.

However, having said that, there is a doctrine in the law called "last clear chance". Whomever has the last clear chance to prevent the accident woud have the most liability. In this case, it seems to fall upon the pilots' (airline) actions as they should have known that they were on the wrong runway, simply by checking their heading and noting the lights, signs etc.

But that doesn't mean that there will be no liability for the airport and FAA as well. This will also depend on the particular state law on negligence that is applied and what it says.

Comair is simply doing what any business should do. They are protecting their interests. That doesn't mean that they won't be liable as well.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12146 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4503 times:

I think I know how the NTSB accident report will read for ComAir 5191;

Cause;
Pilot Error, the flight crew lined up on the wrong runway, and failed to complete an instrument cross check prior to beginning the take off roll.
The flight crew failed to recongnise clues, such as no runway lighting, lighted distance to go signs, and runway heading, to alert them they were departing on the wrong runway.

Contributing Factors;
The departure runway was not long enough for this departure.
The FAA ATCT was not properly manned at the time of the accident.
The flight crew failed to follow the published NOTAMs for LEX.
The flight crew failed to follow ATCT ground control taxi instructions to the proper departure runway.
The flight crew failed to follow departure clearences issued by ATC.
The Pilot in Command failed to use CRM.

The only purpose for the filing of this law suit is to spread the blame, and reduce any possible pay outs ComAir will have to make.

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 2):
It's a b.s. lawsuit. If the flight crew had checked their heading, before proceeding down an unlit runway, there would have been no accident.

 checkmark 

Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 1):
I can see where Comair is coming from on this, but can also see a lot of pushback. All I hope is that the litigation does not take such a long time that it hurts the families of the deceased.

This action by ComAir already shows they could care less about the surviving family members. All they want to do now is reduce their own liability and responsibility for this needless crash. This suit is all about the money.....ComAir's, and their insurance carrier's money.


User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4462 times:

Quote:
This is a normal part of the process of accident litigation.

Quite correct. It is also standard operating procedure to file any and all lawsuits before the statute of limitations kicks in.

Many, if not most, are dropped later when the causes become clearer, but it is done specifically "just in case".

It's rough, but that's the way it works.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineZOTAN From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 609 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4409 times:

What a BS lawsuit ...

Sec. 91.3 - Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.


User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 693 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4057 times:

Quoting ZOTAN (Reply 16):
What a BS lawsuit ...

Sec. 91.3 - Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

You are absolutely right and that will be determined by the court as far as liability.

However, you are forgetting that ATC also has a responsibility and the airport also has a responsibility to design appropriate layouts and markings.

I remember a few years ago, when Miami implemented its new runway,(8-26) they numbered it in a way that there were quite a few incidents where aircraft that were cleared to land on 9L landed on 8 by mistake, because it was to the left of 9L. Then they renumbered it to 8L and 8R and those mistakes have now been solved. And in that situation the pilots all had the proper plates etc. But the runway layout was simply confusing, as it was in LEX with the taxi layout that had been modified.

Also, keep in mind that whatever the NTSB says in their final report, (and I think that they will spread the blame where it belongs), the actual findings of probable cause are not usable in a civil court for liability purposes.

The civil case will use evidence and their own experts.


User currently offlineTRVYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1370 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3992 times:

Sorry if it may sound strange, but I have a feeling that this accident would not have happened if it was some other airport. It was already known that the two RWYs were confusing and even more so due to the recent construction. Not a means of discount to the pilots( they made a mistake), but if one of the above was was in order , it wouldn't have happened.

The airport/authority should have forseen a possiblity of an a/c taking a wrong rwy and should have taken clear steps to avoid such a mistake.

From a safety point of view (as a electrical safety engineer myself), a single fault is always anticipated ie, a single fault should not cause any danger.


User currently offlineDCAYOW From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 602 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3867 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 10):
their pilots lined up their plane in the dark on an unlit runway while a perfectly lit runway was crossing directly in front of them and their pilots crashed their plane and as a result 49 of their passengers were tragically killed?

I have heard, but can't verify that the runway used was at a slightly different elevation that the main runway - that is its sunk a bit at the end. I was told because of a slight hump they couldn't see the other runway from end of the shorter runway, only when they crossed or came over the hump could they realize that a mistake was in progress. That does however prompt the question of why an abort procedure was not initiated.



Retorne ao céu...
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12146 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3781 times:

Quoting TRVYYZ (Reply 18):
It was already known that the two RWYs were confusing and even more so due to the recent construction.

All the more reason to know what you are doing, and where you are on the airport.

Quoting DCAYOW (Reply 19):
I have heard, but can't verify that the runway used was at a slightly different elevation that the main runway - that is its sunk a bit at the end. I was told because of a slight hump they couldn't see the other runway from end of the shorter runway, only when they crossed or came over the hump could they realize that a mistake was in progress. That does however prompt the question of why an abort procedure was not initiated

Those are additional clues this crew should have noticed. Remember, this crew had flown into and out of LEX many times before the accident.


User currently offlineRongotai From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 477 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3733 times:

I find it extraordinary that 16 years after the publication of Reason's 'Human Error' and at least 10 years after it's principles have been largely incorporated into crash investigation practices globally, there are still people who basically take the position that ALL the blame attaches to the flight crew.

User currently offlineXjramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2461 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3672 times:

Quoting Rongotai (Reply 21):
I find it extraordinary that 16 years after the publication of Reason's 'Human Error' and at least 10 years after it's principles have been largely incorporated into crash investigation practices globally, there are still people who basically take the position that ALL the blame attaches to the flight crew.

Well....it does.

While everyone has agreed with the fact that there were multiple parties involved that may have been able to prevent it, there is only one real responsible party in this accident.

Quoting ZOTAN (Reply 16):
Sec. 91.3 - Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

No matter what ATC tells us, we as pilot in commands are ultimately responsible. Simple as that!

XJR



Look ma' no hands!
User currently offlineRiyadhnurse From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 99 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3663 times:

Wasn't lack of sleep and "fatigue" reported by the crew and controller in the news? That in it self plays havoc with your thought process and ability to concentrate. Very sad it happened at all.


Tongue-tied and twisted,just an earthbound misfit,I.
User currently offlineKaddyuk From Wallis and Futuna, joined Nov 2001, 4126 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3503 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
Pilot Error, the flight crew lined up on the wrong runway, and failed to complete an instrument cross check prior to beginning the take off roll.

The flight crew failed to recongnise clues, such as no runway lighting, lighted distance to go signs, and runway heading, to alert them they were departing on the wrong runway.

The first is not an FAA required procedure. Nor is it a mandated company procedure. If they're not trained to perform such an action then you cant expect them to perform it...

The second is a situational error and not necessarily fault of the pilots. Again unless their procedures tell them to check for these things, you cant expect them to perform such actions...

This is from the article for those who neglected to read it yet still pass judgement...

Quote:
The administrative action against the FAA is "a required procedural step" to any claim for damages against the United States based on the agency's actions, Comair said in a news release.

You only have a certain period of time to file against whoever. This is before the official reports are concluded. So they file, wait for the result and if they can... persue the claim, if not it is dropped post haste...



Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
25 Oldtimer : I have never read a such a bunch of bull in all my life. Not one of the experts condemming the poor flight crew, with one exception has an a/c related
26 RedFlyer : You forgot one: if the pilots had not been so complacent. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to you; however, your argument would have some merit if
27 TRVYYZ : Ok, i am not an aviation guy other than being a spotter. But my question is, Is the Compass Check mandatory before all take-offs? Is it there in the
28 RedFlyer : Can't speak for commercial flying, but as a private pilot I do look at the compass as I line up on the runway. Why? Not because it's part of a "check
29 Post contains links and images ANCFlyer : Lets take an "interesting intersection" for instance . . . how about Lake Otis Parkway and Tudor Road. If I'm traveling West on Lake Otis, and want t
30 Robsawatsky : If that is true, then the passengers' families should only be suing the surviving pilot and the estate of the deceased pilot. Your interpretation of
31 Wukka : I completely understand what you're saying... but I still think that your analogy is flawed. However, the more flawed it is leads to an even more int
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Iamaw Files Against Air Canada posted Thu Apr 1 2004 23:51:35 by Canadi>nBoy
FAA Drops Its 3 Engine 744 Case Against BA posted Sun Sep 24 2006 16:10:03 by Zeke
FAA Approves USA's Newest Commercial Airport posted Mon Sep 18 2006 00:55:15 by 727LOVER
Family Files Lawsuit Over Comair Crash posted Fri Sep 1 2006 20:38:23 by DTW757
Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 5 posted Wed Aug 30 2006 21:32:30 by 777ER
Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part 4 posted Mon Aug 28 2006 21:29:13 by 777ER
Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part III posted Mon Aug 28 2006 05:20:10 by MCOflyer
Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX Part II posted Sun Aug 27 2006 21:23:47 by M180up
Comair CRJ-100 Plane Has Crashed In LEX posted Sun Aug 27 2006 13:58:51 by JAGflyer
Comair Files To Reject FA Union Agreement posted Wed Feb 22 2006 20:47:11 by KarlB737